RE: Circumcision in various populations (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Elisabella -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 4:35:11 PM)

Nah I asked him a yes/no question and he deflected from answering. He's not trying to make any sort of genuine point (if he were he'd be willing to clarify it) he's just talking himself in circles. Probably one of those people who waits for the other side to make a point just so he can disagree with it.



MsLadySue -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 5:15:47 PM)

Rule ... "deleterious alleles in the future gene pool"

Where do you get this crap from? I did some reading on the subject and can find nothing to back up your statement.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 5:32:43 PM)

You err in mistaking me for a parrot.



MsLadySue -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 5:44:33 PM)

I would never call you a parrot. They repeat words they have heard over and over again. You on the other hand have made a comment that makes absolutely no sense in response to my statement. Easier to make silly comments than to actually explain yourself and where you came up with your original statement which I quoted.



JstAnotherSub -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 5:57:14 PM)

~FR~

With all the dick slapping going on in here, I may start a poll.......in fact, the merrywanna tells me I must!

Which dick gets red sooner when being slapped on the table to seemingly prove a point?

___ check here if you wish to vote for circumcised.


___ check here if you wish to vote for uncircumcised


I apologise if this is a hijack, but really, I tried to figure out the topic and this came as close as anything else. IMHO.



JstAnotherSub -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 6:02:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Clearly american six fingered amish are creating an abundance of three toed sloths by having nothing to do with them whatsoever.

Or would it be the other way round in your world?



That is some deep shit man. Like, wow dude. Are you Jesus?

Tis hard to type that when your throat hurts from damn near choking to death with laughter.




Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 6:24:05 PM)

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)



Elisabella -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 6:27:03 PM)

Tay-Sachs is a genetic disorder. Muslims and Jews, both being Semitic peoples from the same region in the world, are likely to share the same genetic diseases.

It's like how sickle cell is more prevalent in black people.

Circumcision does not alter a person's DNA.



angelikaJ -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 6:35:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

Rule, your logic is just not "logical".
It makes no sense.



outhere69 -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 7:18:06 PM)

It never has.  Jewish people carry Tay-Sachs more often than European cultures because they were a fairly closed society; the same for genetic diseases within Mormon, Amish or Mennonite communities.  Hell, it applies to British and Russian royal families carrying hemophilia.  It has to do with lack of genetic variability, not a practice of circumcision.

However, we've told Rule this many many times and he still doesn't believe it.



MsLadySue -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 7:42:06 PM)

I'm still waiting for facts to back up your theory that circumcision has anything to do with changing DNA.



tazzygirl -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/4/2011 10:36:03 PM)

He cant. And when you dispute him, he merely blocks you. His supergenious ego cant handle the fact that he is wrong.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:00:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
Tay-Sachs is a genetic disorder.

That is what I said: an inherited disease.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
Muslims and Jews, both being Semitic peoples from the same region in the world, are likely to share the same genetic diseases.

That is not the point. The point is the frequency of occurrence of inherited diseases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
It's like how sickle cell is more prevalent in black people.

It is not like that at all. Sickle cell anemia was/is a beneficent genetic trait in the areas where it was/is endemic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
Circumcision does not alter a person's DNA.

Of course not. Whoever said so? Not me. Nobody can quote me on that.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:03:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders

That list is not quite correct: Celiac disease is not a genetic disorder.

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ
Rule, your logic is just not "logical".
It makes no sense.

Eh? What logic would that be?



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:24:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: outhere69
Jewish people carry Tay-Sachs more often than European cultures because they were a fairly closed society; the same for genetic diseases within Mormon, Amish or Mennonite communities.  Hell, it applies to British and Russian royal families carrying hemophilia.  It has to do with lack of genetic variability, not a practice of circumcision.

Being an 'island' population has got nothing causally to do with it. With about one billion individuals Muslims are not an island population.

I do not know that Mormons have an increased incidence of genetic diseases, but maybe you are correct in that.

Since Mormon, Amish and Mennonite communities are mostly descended from European Christian populations that have and presumably had a six times lower frequency of inherited diseases than Muslims and Jews, it stands to reason that their original gene pool had the same low incidence of inherited diseases. That obviously changed. Just as it will change in the population of USA Christians if they persist in circumcising their males.

quote:

ORIGINAL: outhere69
However, we've told Rule this many many times and he still doesn't believe it.

I rarely believe anything. I either know or I do not know.

I am not aware of believing something at the moment - but I may be wrong.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:54:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsLadySue
I'm still waiting for facts to back up your theory that circumcision has anything to do with changing DNA.

I have already apprised you of the facts: The circumcising populations of Jews and Muslims have a six times higher frequency of inherited diseases than the European Christian population.
(Do not ask me for reference to support that figure for I do not have any. I do not doubt that this figure, that I recall from a brief mention in a newspaper reporting on scientific research of the same, is correct, though.)

The only - and evolutionary HUGE - biologically relevant distinction between both populations is that the one is practicing circumcision and the other is not. (I have been looking for other biologically relevant distinctions between both populations, but I could not find any.)

It is from these two facts that I developed the devious evolutionary algorithm that is the causal link between the latter and the former. But one does not need to know what this algorithm is, nor anything about (population) genetics and gene pools and evolution theory to be convinced of the truth of the causal connection. Simply tell any statistician about the difference in the frequency of inherited diseases between both population and tell him any biologically significant differences - excepting inherited diseases - between both populations and ask him what factors are most likely to be causal. He will mumble and grumble for years on end sweating on his calculations, and at last he will proclaim: "The one populations eats dates, rides on camels and practices circumcision, and the other population does not."



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 4:45:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: outhere69

It never has.  Jewish people carry Tay-Sachs more often than European cultures because they were a fairly closed society; the same for genetic diseases within Mormon, Amish or Mennonite communities.  Hell, it applies to British and Russian royal families carrying hemophilia.  It has to do with lack of genetic variability, not a practice of circumcision.

However, we've told Rule this many many times and he still doesn't believe it.



On that one, given his current line is that circumcision (rather than a restricted population pool) causes a rise in genetic diseases, perhaps he feels that haemophilia was common in the Russian aristocracy prior to the revolution because they'd all been cut?

"Damnit, Raspution, that's the third heir who's bled to death after being circumcised today! I think it's time for another pogrom..."



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 4:50:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsLadySue
I'm still waiting for facts to back up your theory that circumcision has anything to do with changing DNA.

I have already apprised you of the facts: The circumcising populations of Jews and Muslims have a six times higher frequency of inherited diseases than the European Christian population.
(Do not ask me for reference to support that figure for I do not have any. I do not doubt that this figure, that I recall from a brief mention in a newspaper reporting on scientific research of the same, is correct, though.)

Perhaps you should find one, then. It'd make it look less like you were inventing stuff, after all.

quote:

The only - and evolutionary HUGE - biologically relevant distinction between both populations is that the one is practicing circumcision and the other is not. (I have been looking for other biologically relevant distinctions between both populations, but I could not find any.)

There's a few more factors, most of which anybody who claims to have a clue about this should know about. A closed genetic pool and a society which somewhat discourages miscegenation, for a start.

quote:

It is from these two facts that I developed the devious evolutionary algorithm that is the causal link between the latter and the former. But one does not need to know what this algorithm is, nor anything about (population) genetics and gene pools and evolution theory to be convinced of the truth of the causal connection.

Which translates as "If I say something is true, then I don't need to provide any proof or documentation.



FullCircle -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 4:59:59 AM)

We all know that circumcision only exists because religious parents are squeamish about having the 'How to keep your penis clean' conversation.

"'Mommy mommy how do I keep my penis clean?"
"CUT IT OFF IT'S EVIL."

Having said that Rule is 100% wrong, as usual.



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 5:07:28 AM)

I think the 'hygiene" thing is a bit more specific than that.

Think about it: Islam and Judaism both started as desert religions. The other groups who have historically practised circumcision as a cultural thing also tend to live in deserts. Sand under the foreskin is not fun, as any uncut man who's ever had a storker on a beach can tell you...



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125